“Advocates” Whine About NC Anti-Mask Law

Where were they when the law was in force prior to the Chinese coronavirus? It was only on the books since 1953

NC anti-mask bill could violate federal law, disability rights and free speech advocates say

An effort by North Carolina lawmakers that would prohibit people from wearing masks for health reasons would violate federal laws that protect free speech and access to government services, disability rights and free speech advocates say.

Under the proposed law, House Bill 237, many people who want to wear a mask in public for ensuring physical health could face penalties for doing so. That would include people who want to wear a face covering in public to prevent spreading — or protect against contracting — an illness such as Covid-19 or influenza.

Oh, please. Almost no one did this before COVID. The flu was around long before that, and you saw almost no one do this. And, let’s be honest, the police won’t bother enforcing this on people wandering around wearing a high grade mask (not that they will really help). This is about those wearing them to protect from being identified as they commit crimes and such

Republican sponsors — who titled the bill “Unmasking Mobs and Criminals” — say the proposal is intended to crack down on protesters. They want to make it harder for protesters to hide their identities, and to make it easier for law enforcement to charge protesters who commit crimes. Without it, “the burden would be much higher for law enforcement,” Sen. Buck Newton, R-Wilson, said Wednesday during a debate on the Senate floor.

Plus, it’s fun identifying wackos who support Islamic terrorist groups, especially when they apply for jobs.

Portions of the bill would violate free speech protections under the First Amendment — particularly if, when applied, they target only protesters, said Liz Barber, director of policy and advocacy at the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina. But the bill could be particularly chilling to people with disabilities. “Taking away their ability to mask safely, I think, would also then take away their ability to safely assemble,” she said.

Weirdly, the ACLU of NC wasn’t complaining when NC passed the same type of legislation which was aimed primarily at the KKK and it sat on the books till COVID. If the kiddies were truly concerned about catching COVID, which we know they’re not, they wouldn’t be gathering in large numbers. Listen, just admit you want criminals and people “protesting”, like how they’re protesting Israel and in favor of Hamas, the BLM and Antifa wackos, etc, to be able to hide their identities.

Sen. Sydney Batch, D-Wake, is a cancer survivor. She spoke Wednesday about how her husband and children wore masks to protect her while she was undergoing treatment and had a weakened immune system because of it.

“This bill criminalizes their behavior, and mine,” she said. “… We talk a lot about freedoms in this chamber. I hear it all the time. I should have the freedom — my children and my husband should have the freedom — to wear masks in order to protect and save my life, without fear of being arrested and charged.”

COVID really made these people crazy. Let’s check in with Sen. Batch

Strange, no mask, despite her claims of being immunocompromised

Huh. No one, including her, were wearing masks to protect themselves.

This was just one month after Governor Cooper ended the statewide mandate for masking. But, COVID was still happening. And almost no photos from this point forward feature her wearing a mask, even as she hobnobs with people. She, and her Dem Comrades, just want to protect their criminal and Jew hating base.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

31 Responses to ““Advocates” Whine About NC Anti-Mask Law”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    William Teach typed: police won’t bother enforcing this on people wandering around wearing a high grade mask (not that they will really help)

    Not clear what Mr Teach means by “high grade mask” but N95 masks worn properly reduce viral and bacterial spread. And why would the state gendarmes be concerned about residents wearing masks for whatever reason they wish? If a grandma with asthma wears a mask to the bank should she be arrested?

    We were led to believe that Republicuns advocated FOR personal freedom. No?

    William Teach persisted: it’s fun identifying wackos who support Islamic terrorist groups, especially when they apply for jobs

    Aha, he admits this is a political ploy.

    Why were so many “peaceful” Jan 6 protesters wearing masks? Should DC make wearing masks a crime?

  2. Professor Hale says:

    NYC pillaging and shoplifting gangs take their health protection very seriously. Likely, they all wear condoms during sex too.

  3. Professor Hale says:

    My personal preference is to always punish the behavior, not the motive. Thus, punish people who are committing crimes, regardless of their face coverings. Sure, coverings make identifying them harder. Not my problem. At most, I would agree to a law that says wearing a mask while committing a crime simply is prima facia evidence of pre-meditation. But then I lost the arguments about “hate crimes” too. so here we are.

    Some people notice that the people they want locked up all have a similar characteristic. Since they cannot prevent lawlessness, they attempt to criminalize the “common characteristic”. This normally does not work well.

    Anecdote: I once traveled to a warm sunny place. My “travel agent” prepared me by informing me that some of the local criminals would try to harm me by planting harmful devices along the road so if I see anyone digging along the road, I should “harm them fist”. Such behavior by me was legal and encouraged. Unbeknownst to my “travel agent”, that part of the world was experiencing a great burst of revitalization employing thousands of people digging along the roadsides to install curbs, new planter boxes, street lights and all manner of useful civilized things. If I had followed the rule, I would have harmed a great many harmless people. Lesson: don’t make ordinary things into crimes to catch the criminals. Applies to gun ownership too. Don’t criminalize gun possession. Criminalize using guns to commit rimes.

  4. Professor Hale says:

    I find it mildly irritating the number of petty things lawmakers find to occupy their time so that they can claim to be “doing something” while they ignore or even encourage the great harms that our society suffer under.

  5. L.G.Brandon!, L.G.Brandon! says:

    Just a couple points.

    And why would the state gendarmes be concerned about residents wearing masks for whatever reason they wish?

    Because masks are generally worn for nefarious reasons like robbing people and trying not to be identified. That is the traditional use of a mask. That’s why Democrats wear masks when they’re robbing banks.

    If a grandma with asthma wears a mask to the bank should she be arrested?

    she shouldn’t be arrested but she should be stopped and informed that wearing a mask with asthma is very bad for her ability to breathe. People with asthma should not be wearing masks they haven’t enough time breathing.

    And why would the state gendarmes be concerned about residents wearing masks for whatever reason they wish? If a grandma with asthma wears a mask to the bank should she be arrested?

    Because if you recall we were just coming out of the COVID pandemic that you leftists brainwashed everybody into thinking it was gonna kill us all. It’s amazing how you guys pass the laws and make everything inconvenient for people and then you complain when they do it.

    Aha, he admits this is a political ploy.

    You really don’t get humor at all do you? That’s a problem with you leftists.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:


      Of course asthmatics wear masks to protect themselves. Influenza and Covid are threats to asthmatics.

      Do you and William Teach really believe that protesters should be prohibited from wearing masks by the government?

      Can you devise a sure-fire method to only punish mask-wearers who will be criminals? Mr Teach equates people protesting Israel’s bombing of Gaza to KKK members burning crosses on American citizens’ front lawns!

      Regarding right-wing humor, you’re just not very good at it.

      Here’s what humorist William Teach typed: it’s fun identifying wackos who support Islamic terrorist groups, especially when they apply for jobs

      Where’s the joke? I think Teach was dead serious. You believe/feel he was joking?

      The conservative Ron White ‘comforting’ a fellow passenger on a small plane flying from Flagstaff to Phoenix having engine trouble
      Passenger: “If, if we lose one engine how far will the other engine take us?”
      White, tequila in hand: “All the way to the scene of the crash!”
      White: “Which is convenient since that’s where we’re headed.”
      White: “We should beat the paramedics there by half an hour!”

      And of course, the late, great Jerry Clower

      and Bird Huntin’

      • Dana says:

        Ous socialist from St Louis wrote:

        Mr Teach equates people protesting Israel’s bombing of Gaza to KKK members burning crosses on American citizens’ front lawns!

        I certainly equate the wearing of a black-and-white Palestinian keffiyeh with wearing a Nazi swastika armband! Both are legal, but both are also indicative of a hateful and violent person.

  6. h says:

    Would Mr Teach be willing to exempt that law from the 89% of Muslim women, 86% of Sikh women, 59% of Hindu women?
    Mr Teach is really only concerned with religious freedom of “christians” Prior to Vatican 2
    in 1962 all women in Catholic churches were expected to cover their faces with veils.

    I am old enough to still remember civil rights marchers being arrested or beaten in the South for “parading without a permit”

    No Mr Teach we weren’t brainwashing you telling you that you were all gonna die. We were telling you that covid was going to kill many Americans, especially those who were; overweight or obese, elderly, or those who had suppressed immunity responses. It killed over 1 million, hitting those in the “greatest generation” especially hard. Also hit especially hard were those who lived in red states many of whom were overweight/obese. The covid death rates in some of those states was 3 times as high as in red states as blue states (Mississippi vs Vermont) It is estimated from the studies done in FL and Ohio that about 75% of covid deaths happened to people who voted GOP. Overweight, unvaccinated, believing in the Trump hype that it was all under control, living in rural areas all helped to keep those per capita death numbers high. Losing 750000 GOP voters vs 250000 Dem voters has got to hurt.

    • Jl says:

      “We were telling you Covid would kill the obese, elderly, suppressed immunity systems…”
      You were also telling us masks were required for healthy people, 6 foot distancing rules, Ivermectin wouldn’t work, Covid didn’t come from a lab, and vaccines for children. Forgot a few there, Johnny boy?

      • Jl says:

        And I forgot several, Johnny-your “science” said to shutdown the economy, and that after walking 6 ft apart wearing masks to go into a restaurant, it was ok to take your mask off and sit about 1 foot from the person next to you. *Science*!
        I’m sure you just overlooked those, right?

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Mask cut down the transmission of Covid, as did distancing. Ivermectin didn’t work. Vaccines for children reduced transmission of Covid. Do you have proof that Covid came from a lab?

  7. JimS says:

    Oh Oh…. I guess the Lone Ranger should stay in Texas. 🙂

  8. Dana says:

    Our esteemed host wrote:

    Oh, please. Almost no one did this before COVID.

    And almost no one does so now, unless they are out to commit crimes.

    The very liberal, progressive Philadelphia City Council passed an ordinance banning the wearing of ski masks in certain places, because so many of the bad guys were donning them before committing crimes, to foil the surveillance cameras that seem ubiquitous in the City of Brotherly Love. I haven’t read anything about them reconsidering, due to so many of the pro-Hamas demonstrators concealing their identities.

  9. ruralcounsel says:

    Odd how those who want to protect a “right” to wear a mask had no trouble trying to violate some peoples’ “right” not to wear one just a couple of years ago.

    Any arguments that the masks reduce virus transmission are speculative and hypothetical at best, as most studies have shown masks have little effect. The negative impact of mask wearing would appear to easily outweigh the positives.
    The NIH now lists Ivermectin as an effective treatment.
    Government officials now admit that the 6-foot distancing rule had no scientific basis and was just arbitrary.
    It is now generally accepted that the Covid virus was bioengineered and accidentally released from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Six out of seven CIA analysts assigned to investigate it came to that conclusion. The only people that think otherwise are usually involved and trying to avoid responsibility.

    Those who refuse to accept the these facts that have finally become public knowledge are just in some form of psychological denial, because it upsets their preconceived politics.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      If Mr Trump had been stronger he could have protected you from Dr Fauci. In his next term Trump will show those clowns who’s the boss!

      Now for the misinformation!

      Re “the facts” we should all accept, otherwise we’ve been brainwashed…

      most studies have shown masks have little effect “Most” studies do NOT show masks have little effect. The weasel-worded statement: “The negative impact of mask wearing would appear to easily outweigh the positives” means what?

      The NIH now lists Ivermectin as an effective treatment. The NIH does not list drugs as effective. The US FDA has not approved ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of Covid.

      the 6-foot distancing rule had no scientific basis The general 6 foot distancing recommendation was and is sound epidemiological advice.

      generally accepted that the Covid virus was bioengineered and accidentally released It is not “generally accepted” that the Covid 19 virus was bioengineered and accidentally released from the Wuhan Institute.

      No doubt Mr Trump accepts these “facts”, so when SARS-CoV-3 emerges in 2025 we won’t have to deal with masks, vaccines or distancing and we’ll have ad libitium ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and bleach to protect us.

      • drowningpuppies says:

        Another thoughtless post making exactly no sense that needs no rebuttal.
        Thanks Karen (aka Rimjob).

        Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

      • ruralcounsel says:

        The NIH’s ivermectin page says some randomized trials and studies of ivermectin in COVID-19 patients have shown “no benefits or worsening of disease,” while others showed varying levels of effectiveness, ranging from: “shorter time to resolution of disease manifestations that were attributed to COVID-19, greater reduction in inflammatory marker levels, shorter time to viral clearance, or lower mortality rates in patients who received ivermectin than in patients who received comparator drugs or placebo.”

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Please link the “NIH Ivermectin page”. I suspect you mean any number of articles (10,599 so far) compiled by the National Library of Medicine (NLM, in NIH) for literature searches. This is a common error committed by those unfamiliar with search system. The articles are linked there, but NOT evaluated, refuted or approved by the NIH. It’s still up to the reader to evaluate the quality of the reports. See: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=ivermectin

          See the NIH disclaimer:

          As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health.

          The official NIH position on Ivermectin and Covid is (as of December 2023):

          The Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.


      • ruralcounsel says:

        We have all seen firsthand that near-universal mask wearing in 2020 and early 2021 did nothing to change trends of coronavirus infection. (Further, before Covid hopelessly politicized medical research, the scientific consensus was that standard surgical masks did not slow respiratory viruses and that even higher-end N95 masks had marginal efficacy at most.)

        Fauci knew this reality, of course, which is why on March 8, 2020, he famously told CBS, “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask.”

        From NYT article by John Barry

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Your conclusions on mask wearing and the efficacy of N95 vs surgical masks are not supported by the available evidence. Here is a link to several articles to help guide your thinking. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33360295/

          There is no credible evidence that Covid research was or is hopelessly politicized.

          What Dr Fauci knew in 2020 was that when N95 mask were scarce there was greater value in saving these masks for medical personnel who were seeing dozens of seriously ill patients each day.

  10. ruralcounsel says:

    A few weeks ago, a Cochrane team published “Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses,” their latest review of the evidence for masking and hand-washing, and whether they reduce flu-like illness (including Covid-19). Thanks to Covid, the debate over how well masks work against respiratory illness has gone from a niche disagreement to a question on which everyone in the country now has an opinion. It’s a question ripe for a good, rigorous meta-analysis.
    What we know about masks and Covid

    Nearly all of us wore masks at one time or another, and many of us still do. Did that even help?

    It doesn’t seem like it, according to the Cochrane review: “Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza/SARS-CoV-2 compared to not wearing masks.”

  11. ruralcounsel says:

    Lab Leak Most Likey Caused Pandemic, Energy Department Says

    New intelligence has prompted the Energy Department to conclude that an accidental laboratory leak in China most likely caused the coronavirus pandemic


Pirate's Cove